April 6, 2011
PAUL S. KLEIN, PLAINTIFF,
REID KIMOTO, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Edward C. Reed Senior United States District Judge
The parties have each submitted a form of proposed Pretrial Order.
The matter of admission of exhibits for trial is referred to the Magistrate Judge for purposes of ruling on the admission of the exhibits listed in the Pretrial Order to the extent this can reasonably and feasibly be done pretrial.
The proposed witness lists, as set forth in the Pretrial Order, are referred to the Magistrate Judge for consideration and decision as to whether any of such witnesses should not be permitted to testify because such witness was not previously properly disclosed or the testimony of such witness would be irrelevant, or their testimony would be inappropriate, duplicative or unreasonably cumulative. The Magistrate Judge is authorized to require offers of proof as to the testimony to be offered by each such witness.
The Magistrate Judge is authorized to modify the Pretrial Order upon consideration of these or other appropriate matters, and to make all rulings thereon which reasonably can be made.
The Magistrate Judge will substantially assist the Court in the processing of this case by undertaking the foregoing proceedings. By going through the items of evidence and considering the respective witnesses' testimony, frequently the parties and/or the Court will reasonably, readily, recognize evidence which is inadmissible, or should be withdrawn, or which, upon proper available foundation, will be obviously admissible, or on the other hand, where ruling should be withheld until trial. The Magistrate Judge will have the benefit of the Pretrial Order and the arguments of counsel to assist in making these rulings.
Obviously, the conduct of the trial will be greatly expedited by the Magistrate Judge undertaking this assignment.
The rulings of the Magistrate Judge will be subject to appeal to this Judge, if timely appeal is filed. The Magistrate Judge has extensive experience in resolving such matters, both as an attorney in practice, and sitting on the bench as a trial judge, and is well qualified to undertake such rulings
We realize this order places a considerable burden on the Magistrate Judge. We trust, however, that the Magistrate Judge will not be inclined to ignore this order, but if the Magistrate Judge would prefer not to undertake this reference, or feels uncomfortable in doing so, or feels such an order is inappropriate in the circumstances, we would be so advised so that we can undertake to arrange for other procedures to accomplish the goals we seek to achieve in entering this order.
© 1992-2014 VersusLaw Inc.